Misconduct In Matrimonial Life Can Cost Government Job Too, Says Madras High Court

Last Updated:
A public servant is expected to maintain honesty, integrity and good conduct both inside the office and in the society, the court observed
The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court recently observed that misconduct arising from personal matrimonial disputes, too, could be grounds for termination in government service, including contractual appointments.
The judgment came in an appeal filed by the Executive Secretary of the District Health Society, Ramanathapuram, and other officials, who had challenged a 2018 single-judge order that reinstated KS Subha Karuthukhan, a dental assistant, who was disengaged following his involvement in a criminal case related to a matrimonial dispute.
Karuthukhan had been working on a contractual basis at the Government Upgraded Primary Health Centre in Bogaloor. His services, originally for a one-year period, had been renewed periodically until 2017, when the authorities terminated his engagement following his implication in a criminal matter.
The single judge bench, while ruling in his favour in 2018, had held that involvement in a matrimonial case should not become a roadblock for someone serving in a government post, particularly on a contractual basis.
However, a division bench comprising Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice Dr AD Maria Clete disagreed with this interpretation.
Referring to the Tamil Nadu Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1973, the court held that misconduct, even in personal relationships, can be considered a valid basis for departmental action. The bench emphasised that government employees—permanent or contractual—are expected to maintain integrity and good conduct not just within the office, but also in society.
'A public servant is expected to maintain honesty, integrity, and good conduct both inside the office and in the society," the court noted, underlining that such standards are not limited to official duties alone.
Further, since the respondent's contract had already expired in 2017, the court said there was no question of reinstatement. The appeal was allowed, and the previous writ order was set aside.
First Published:
June 20, 2025, 18:22 IST

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Hindu

2 hours ago

• The Hindu

HC sets aside condition requiring vehicle pass for participants coming to Lord Murugan devotees conference

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Friday set aside the condition requiring vehicle pass for participants to attend Muruga Bakthargalin Aanmeega Maanadu to be held in Madurai on June 22. The court was hearing an appeal preferred by M. Arasupandi of Madurai, zonal secretary of Hindu Munnani, who challenged the condition requiring vehicle pass for participants to attend the event. Allowing the appeal, a Division Bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and K. Rajasekar observed that the condition imposed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Anna Nagar range, Madurai, lacked jurisdiction. The Assistant Commissioner could not have issued a blanket prohibitory order restraining the entry of vehicles into Madurai city without vehicle pass for the conference participants. 'We fail to understand as to how such a condition could have been imposed by the Assistant Commissioner in the first place. An Assistant Commissioner can have jurisdiction and sway only over the territorial limits and not over the entire Madurai city', the court observed. Right to movement throughout India is guaranteed to all citizens under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution. It is open to any citizen to enter Madurai city in his/her vehicle and such a right cannot be interfered with by an Assistant Commissioner of Police. 'We are a republican democracy. Just as ease of doing business is important, the ease of participation in democratic gatherings is equally vital. The authorities ought not to come in the way of the citizens exercising their democratic right', the court observed. The court observed that if the objective of the police is to gather details and particulars of the vehicles entering the area where the event is to be held, it can be easily achieved by employing a simple technology such as scanning the license plates of vehicles. To address the concerns expressed by authorities, the appellant had undertaken that participants who come in personal or hired vehicles would deposit photostat copies of RC book, insurance certificate and driving licence in the police booths maintained by Madurai City Police at the earmarked parking places. The organisers assured the court that arrangements had been made so that there would be no stampede which was witnessed in Bengaluru, Delhi and other places recently.

Mint

5 hours ago

• Mint

Madras High Court's BIG verdict: Not necessary for woman to get husband's signature for applying passport

In a big move, the Madras High Court, on Friday declared that it is not necessary for a woman to get the permission of her husband and take his signature before applying for a passport before the authority. Justice N Anand Venkatesh declared the ruling while disposing a woman's petition who sought direction to the authorities to issue a fresh passport without insisting signature from her husband in a time bound manner. 'It is not necessary for a wife to get the permission of her husband and take his signature before applying for a passport before the authority,' PTI quoted Judge Venkatesh as saying. In her petition, the woman, Revathi stated that despite a pending divorce case filed by her husband after their marriage in 2023, the Regional Passport Office (RPO) refused to process her passport application submitted in April 2025, citing the need for her husband's signature in Form-J before proceeding. The Madras High Court also noted that forcing the wife to get her husband's signature when the relationship between the parties was in doldrums, was like asking the woman to fulfil an impossibility, reported Live Law. "The practice of insisting for permission from the husband to apply for a passport, does not augur well for a society which is moving towards woman emancipation. This practice is nothing short of male supremacism", the judge further noted while hearing the case. The judge also noted that the insistence made by the RPO shows the mindset of the society in treating women who were married as if they were chattel belonging to the husband. Justice Anand Venkatesh directed the RPO to process the woman's passport application and issue a passport in her name on her satisfying the other requirements. This process shall be completed within four weeks, the judge added.

News18

6 hours ago

• News18

Misconduct In Matrimonial Life Can Cost Government Job Too, Says Madras High Court

Last Updated: A public servant is expected to maintain honesty, integrity and good conduct both inside the office and in the society, the court observed The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court recently observed that misconduct arising from personal matrimonial disputes, too, could be grounds for termination in government service, including contractual appointments. The judgment came in an appeal filed by the Executive Secretary of the District Health Society, Ramanathapuram, and other officials, who had challenged a 2018 single-judge order that reinstated KS Subha Karuthukhan, a dental assistant, who was disengaged following his involvement in a criminal case related to a matrimonial dispute. Karuthukhan had been working on a contractual basis at the Government Upgraded Primary Health Centre in Bogaloor. His services, originally for a one-year period, had been renewed periodically until 2017, when the authorities terminated his engagement following his implication in a criminal matter. The single judge bench, while ruling in his favour in 2018, had held that involvement in a matrimonial case should not become a roadblock for someone serving in a government post, particularly on a contractual basis. However, a division bench comprising Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice Dr AD Maria Clete disagreed with this interpretation. Referring to the Tamil Nadu Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1973, the court held that misconduct, even in personal relationships, can be considered a valid basis for departmental action. The bench emphasised that government employees—permanent or contractual—are expected to maintain integrity and good conduct not just within the office, but also in society. 'A public servant is expected to maintain honesty, integrity, and good conduct both inside the office and in the society," the court noted, underlining that such standards are not limited to official duties alone. Further, since the respondent's contract had already expired in 2017, the court said there was no question of reinstatement. The appeal was allowed, and the previous writ order was set aside. First Published: June 20, 2025, 18:22 IST